Discuss: Airport Security, Body Scanners, Grope/Pat-Downs..

MrsKizdoodle · November 2010

thedutchgirl:
I too think the comparison to driving is not accurate, but some people in other forums have raised it, so I thought I'd respond to it preemptively.
As for how the searches are unconstitutional, here's a lesson on the Fourth Amendment. It prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. To be reasonable under the Fourth Amendment, the government must have suspicion that the person being searched has done something wrong. The government cannot even force you to give them your fingerprints without suspicion, except under certain circumstances. Even DUI checkpoints you constitutionally can avoid. To require every single person to submit to the new machines, for which they do not know the levels of radiation, or to submit to groping by TSA agents, without suspicion that you are a person who is carrying a weapon violates those Fourth Amendment principles.
MM talked about this earlier in the week. It takes a bit before the people opposing the measures chime in, but several of them are smarter than I am and provide even more information detailing why this is a civil liberties issue that we should just not roll over and take.
http://community.thenest.com/cs/ks/forums/thread/45394541.aspx

Thanks for the info!

wittyschaffy · November 2010

I will be totally up front about this but I haven't flow in about a year so I haven't experienced the "new" stuff. I've just dealt with the regular old hassles.

I've had to be patted down once because I set off the metal detectors with nothing in my pockets. They ran the hand scanner all over and it never beeped so I had to get patted down. Still nothing (they said that sometimes people are wearing enough combined metal objects to set off the main scanner but it isn't enough to trigger the hand one - things like cosmetics (yeah, cosmetics), hardware on bras, jewelry, etc.). I did laugh out loud when they informed me that they would use the back of their hand to go over any "sensitive" areas - like that would make it less intrusive?? After that, I got "randomly selected" to have my bag searched at the gate. Random - really? Why don't they just say "we pulled you out of the line because you set off our alarms and now we want to watch you carefully".

All in all, I think that they need to make the old systems work better before they add in new ones. I accidentally brought hand sanitizer and chapstick to and from Chicago in my purse. They never saw it, never confiscated it, and it was not pulled out with the other liquids because I had forgotten entirely that it was there. Of course I wasn't going to blow up a plane, but still they missed it. I am not overly fond of the idea of more exposure to radiation but if that is what they're doing, I'm not going to make a fuss because I fly so infrequently. I can see it being a bigger issue for people who travel regularly. *shrug* I guess I can see the point of the folks who are really upset by it, but I'm just not concerned about it I guess. Huh?

anitalynn · November 2010

A news article about an indecent search at a Texas airport from a few years ago.

Elizabeth81 · November 2010

thedutchgirl:
I do not like it. I don't like the scanners. I don't like the patdowns. Neither are effective for anything more than the feeling of security. Which means nothing. I am not a fan of an unconstitutional search to pursue an activity. That so many people are perfectly ok with the huge violation of civil liberties in exchange for simply a feeling of security is, frankly, appalling to me.

Very well said. Huge dittos.

ETA: I really can't believe more people aren't up in arms over the option of "let us take naked pictures of yourself or get intimately groped or you just continue past the checkpoint." I'm pretty sure if you had the above options as your only option to, say, walk into a football stadium (or to do any other activity), people would be losing it. The fourth amendment isn't optional just because you choose to fly.

MrsGo4Hockeychick · November 2010

Elizabeth81:
thedutchgirl:
I do not like it. I don't like the scanners. I don't like the patdowns. Neither are effective for anything more than the feeling of security. Which means nothing. I am not a fan of an unconstitutional search to pursue an activity. That so many people are perfectly ok with the huge violation of civil liberties in exchange for simply a feeling of security is, frankly, appalling to me.
Very well said. Huge dittos.
ETA: I really can't believe more people aren't up in arms over the option of "let us take naked pictures of yourself or get intimately groped or you just continue past the checkpoint." I'm pretty sure if you had the above options as your only option to, say, walk into a football stadium (or to do any other activity), people would be losing it. The fourth amendment isn't optional just because you choose to fly.

my bag is searched, and jackets are often patted down every time I've ever entered an arena for a sporting event. Definitely not as thoroughly as is done at the airport, but it is done.

sunkiss177 · November 2010

I came across my very first body scanner a couple weeks ago ? how horrible, but I have been on so many planes this month I don?t even remember which airport.

I watched the TSA woman send every other person through the scanner. I should have let someone pass me up just to see what would have happened (since it is supposed to be random). I watched the people go through and I read their little info sign. I was the ?every other person? for the scanner. I oppose them. The TSA woman directing traffic was less then pleasant and I had some time on my hands.. I asked her why I was assigned to this side (at the time there was someone in the body scanner but the metal detector was open) and she told me ?because that is where I want you to go?. I asked her if this was the new ?safety measure? that produces naked images of people that pass through and may cause unknown health issues? She said, ?it may be.? I took my time to re-read the sign before saying ?I opted out?.

She rolled her eyes and huffed into her walkie-talkie ?we have a female opt out.? The woman who came for the pat down was very professional and apologetic. I kind of felt bad for making her do it. And while the fingers down the waist band thing is a big step-up the rest of the pat down seemed pretty routine. I had pants with an elastic waist band, but I wonder what would have happened if I was wearing some of my regular pants with the now unfortunately tight waists.

I am sure the TSA woman I did not care for was just having an off day or was sick of people talking abou the scanner in negative ways. It is her job to inforce the rules so there is not much she can do. However, this isnt a well established common practice yet so she should be a bit more informative.

Providing I have time to catch my flights, I will be opting out of the scanner. I certainly would not go though it pregnant. I would think that even at low levels of radiation, it has no negative impacts. I am unsure what I would do at international airports where they may value a complaining American?s rights less.

I do not oppose having them, but I do want the option to opt out.

anitalynn · November 2010

MrsGo4Hockeychick:
Elizabeth81:
thedutchgirl:
I do not like it. I don't like the scanners. I don't like the patdowns. Neither are effective for anything more than the feeling of security. Which means nothing. I am not a fan of an unconstitutional search to pursue an activity. That so many people are perfectly ok with the huge violation of civil liberties in exchange for simply a feeling of security is, frankly, appalling to me.
Very well said. Huge dittos.
ETA: I really can't believe more people aren't up in arms over the option of "let us take naked pictures of yourself or get intimately groped or you just continue past the checkpoint." I'm pretty sure if you had the above options as your only option to, say, walk into a football stadium (or to do any other activity), people would be losing it. The fourth amendment isn't optional just because you choose to fly.
my bag is searched, and jackets are often patted down every time I've ever entered an arena for a sporting event. Definitely not as thoroughly as is done at the airport, but it is done.

Did the gate agent at the arena run their fingers inside your pants/underwear band, as has been reported to be happening with the new airlines pat downs? If they had - would you consider that to be too personal, too intrusive?

Elizabeth81 · November 2010

MrsGo4Hockeychick:
Elizabeth81:
thedutchgirl:
I do not like it. I don't like the scanners. I don't like the patdowns. Neither are effective for anything more than the feeling of security. Which means nothing. I am not a fan of an unconstitutional search to pursue an activity. That so many people are perfectly ok with the huge violation of civil liberties in exchange for simply a feeling of security is, frankly, appalling to me.
Very well said. Huge dittos.
ETA: I really can't believe more people aren't up in arms over the option of "let us take naked pictures of yourself or get intimately groped or you just continue past the checkpoint." I'm pretty sure if you had the above options as your only option to, say, walk into a football stadium (or to do any other activity), people would be losing it. The fourth amendment isn't optional just because you choose to fly.
my bag is searched, and jackets are often patted down every time I've ever entered an arena for a sporting event. Definitely not as thoroughly as is done at the airport, but it is done.

Are your boobs and vagina felt up, too?

MrsGo4Hockeychick · November 2010

anitalynn:
MrsGo4Hockeychick:
Elizabeth81:
thedutchgirl:
I do not like it. I don't like the scanners. I don't like the patdowns. Neither are effective for anything more than the feeling of security. Which means nothing. I am not a fan of an unconstitutional search to pursue an activity. That so many people are perfectly ok with the huge violation of civil liberties in exchange for simply a feeling of security is, frankly, appalling to me.
Very well said. Huge dittos.
ETA: I really can't believe more people aren't up in arms over the option of "let us take naked pictures of yourself or get intimately groped or you just continue past the checkpoint." I'm pretty sure if you had the above options as your only option to, say, walk into a football stadium (or to do any other activity), people would be losing it. The fourth amendment isn't optional just because you choose to fly.
my bag is searched, and jackets are often patted down every time I've ever entered an arena for a sporting event. Definitely not as thoroughly as is done at the airport, but it is done.
Did the gate agent at the arena run their fingers inside your pants/underwear band, as has been reported to be happening with the new airlines pat downs? If they had - would you consider that to be too personal, too intrusive?

nope. But it's also not part of the security procedures I agree to for that venue when buying my ticket.

It IS when I buy an airline ticket.

Frankly I have nothing to hide. I'd prefer getting a pat down over getting blown out of the sky any day. And they haven't been proven to NOT work.

It's simple. Don't like it, don't fly. Vote with your dollars.

MrsGo4Hockeychick · November 2010

Elizabeth81:
MrsGo4Hockeychick:
Elizabeth81:
thedutchgirl:
I do not like it. I don't like the scanners. I don't like the patdowns. Neither are effective for anything more than the feeling of security. Which means nothing. I am not a fan of an unconstitutional search to pursue an activity. That so many people are perfectly ok with the huge violation of civil liberties in exchange for simply a feeling of security is, frankly, appalling to me.
Very well said. Huge dittos.
ETA: I really can't believe more people aren't up in arms over the option of "let us take naked pictures of yourself or get intimately groped or you just continue past the checkpoint." I'm pretty sure if you had the above options as your only option to, say, walk into a football stadium (or to do any other activity), people would be losing it. The fourth amendment isn't optional just because you choose to fly.
my bag is searched, and jackets are often patted down every time I've ever entered an arena for a sporting event. Definitely not as thoroughly as is done at the airport, but it is done.

Are your boobs and vagina felt up, too?

well, knowing basic human anatomy, and knowing that the pat downs are done with clothes ON, I know that it is all but impossible for a TSA agent to touch my vagina.

And if a TSA agent did indeed actually touch my vagina, there would be sexual assault charges filed.

Elizabeth81 · November 2010

MrsGo4Hockeychick:
Elizabeth81:
MrsGo4Hockeychick:
Elizabeth81:
thedutchgirl:
I do not like it. I don't like the scanners. I don't like the patdowns. Neither are effective for anything more than the feeling of security. Which means nothing. I am not a fan of an unconstitutional search to pursue an activity. That so many people are perfectly ok with the huge violation of civil liberties in exchange for simply a feeling of security is, frankly, appalling to me.
Very well said. Huge dittos.
ETA: I really can't believe more people aren't up in arms over the option of "let us take naked pictures of yourself or get intimately groped or you just continue past the checkpoint." I'm pretty sure if you had the above options as your only option to, say, walk into a football stadium (or to do any other activity), people would be losing it. The fourth amendment isn't optional just because you choose to fly.
my bag is searched, and jackets are often patted down every time I've ever entered an arena for a sporting event. Definitely not as thoroughly as is done at the airport, but it is done.

Are your boobs and vagina felt up, too?
well, knowing basic human anatomy, and knowing that the pat downs are done with clothes ON, I know that it is all but impossible for a TSA agent to touch my vagina.
And if a TSA agent did indeed actually touch my vagina, there would be sexual assault charges filed.

Frankly, I find the "I have nothing to hide" argument a bit tired. The fourth amendment prohibits the government to perform any search or seizure unless they have reasonable suspicion that you've done something wrong. Period. It's why the government can't put a wiretap on your phone randomly, come into your house and search it "just because" or pull you over when you're driving when you haven't committed any traffic infraction. I can't imagine a scenario where simply purchasing an airline ticket, without more, gives any suspicion of anything other than an intent to travel. But hey, if you're OK with having to either be virtually strip searched or intimately groped for no reason, I hope you are actively volunteering for the invasive pat-downs every time you fly.

Further, it doesn't sound like you actually know what the pat-downs are like. I highly encourage you to educate yourself what they actually entail before assuming that they're entirely over clothing. Or that they simply run their hands over your clothing like a regular pat-down. I hope it makes you re-think your stance on this.

Regarding the last bit - the "we don't know that it doesn't work, so we should keep doing it" part. Honestly, it's so specious I don't even know how to appropriately respond. We don't know if a lot of things work to "stop terrorism." Should we start employing every technique everyone comes up with, no matter how far-fetched?

MrsGo4Hockeychick · November 2010

LOL. The pat downs are done in public view. They don't take you to some back room, make you strip and then feel you up. If you really, truly have ANY proof that the pat downs are done without clothing on, I would LOVE to see it. LOVE. Running fingers inside the waistband does not count.

Making the sexual innuendos and comparisons to sexual assault not only completely down plays the horrific acts many people have actually suffered, they are completely asinine.

I know exactly what these pat downs entail. They are not invasive. They are not sexual assault. And I have yet to see anyone offer something better.

But thanks for the laugh. I had no idea there were actually women out there who didn't realize their vagina is an internal organ.

rock-elle · November 2010

I'm with MrsGo4Hockey, if you don't want the search or the scan, don't fly. Pretty simple right? take a train or a bus or fvcking walk for all I care.

anitalynn · November 2010

Elizabeth81:

Frankly, I find the "I have nothing to hide" argument a bit tired. The fourth amendment prohibits the government to perform any search or seizure unless they have reasonable suspicion that you've done something wrong. Period. It's why the government can't put a wiretap on your phone randomly, come into your house and search it "just because" or pull you over when you're driving when you haven't committed any traffic infraction. I can't imagine a scenario where simply purchasing an airline ticket, without more, gives any suspicion of anything other than an intent to travel. But hey, if you're OK with having to either be virtually strip searched or intimately groped for no reason, I hope you are actively volunteering for the invasive pat-downs every time you fly.

Further, it doesn't sound like you actually know what the pat-downs are like. I highly encourage you to educate yourself what they actually entail before assuming that they're entirely over clothing. Or that they simply run their hands over your clothing like a regular pat-down. I hope it makes you re-think your stance on this.

Regarding the last bit - the "we don't know that it doesn't work, so we should keep doing it" part. Honestly, it's so specious I don't even know how to appropriately respond. We don't know if a lot of things work to "stop terrorism." Should we start employing every technique everyone comes up with, no matter how far-fetched?

I couldn't agree with all of this more. I just want to bold, highlight, underline, SCREAM this.

I don't feel like I should have to submit myself to unnecessary searches without reason, and I shoudn't have to give up on my Fourth Amendment rights just to get on an airplane. The government needs to do the work up front - linking all online and phone reservation systems to the no-fly and watch lists so those people can be pulled aside at security for special screening. The government needs to be inspecting all cargo, which they aren't doing. The government needs to figure out how to commnicate more effectively so that people who are on the do not fly list or the watch list (like the times square attempted bomber, the undie bomber) don't make it TO.THE.GATE (or on the plane, as was with the undie bomber). There are plenty of things that our government and the international community COULD be doing to actually make us more safe. Instead, they give us an incredibly false sense of security by subjecting us to the searches and scans that are intrusive, potentially illegal, potentially harmful to our health, and that only give the illusion of us being more safe. It's BS, and they will continue to ramp things up unless everyone starts standing up for something.

thedutchgirl · November 2010

Here's just one of a number of stories coming out. After a full-hand cup of her breast, they required a breast-cancer survivor to pull out her prosthetic breast and show the TSA agents. This woman is a flight attendant, so she's not likely some crazy nutjob making up stories to be sensationalist. This woman flies for a living. I'm not sure exactly how she can "fvcking walk" instead of flying. (A suggestion so offensive I can hardly formulate a response.)

http://www.wbtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=13534628

Discuss: Airport Security, Body Scanners, Grope/Pat-Downs..

Re: Discuss: Airport Security, Body Scanners, Grope/Pat-Downs..

Choose Another Board

Search Boards